PDA

View Full Version : Scott Walker's DIRTY little secret.



Qtec
02-24-2011, 04:45 AM
No....he is not a closet homosexual foot tapper as far as I know, if that's what you were all thinking. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

It seems its not ALL about breaking the Unions.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The bill includes a provision that would allow the state to sell or contract out the operation of heating, cooling, and power plants <span style='font-size: 20pt'>without a bidding process and without consulting the state’s independent utility regulator.</span> Democratic legislators worried aloud that the process would attract abuse, and Jon Peacock, director of the Wisconsin Budget Project, called the no-bid approach a “red flag.” </div></div>

Quiz.

Are any of Scott's backers in the power business?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Vital Signs: <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Media hones in on Koch brothers and Walker's proposal to sell state energy plants</span> <span style="color: #990000"> Can't wait to hear the Fox News take on this, if they mention it.</span>

SHAWN DOHERTY | The Capital Times | sdoherty@madison.com | Posted: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 7:30 am

No wonder Gov. Walker was in such a hurry to get his budget repair bill passed. Every day new stuff comes out about it.

The labor issues were obvious and got all the attention for a while. But then people started uncovering the fact that the bill would hand the Walker administration sweeping powers to revamp Medicaid with little public and legislative input.

<u>Now a third piece of the 144-page bill is making headlines — a power grab some critics believe could be political payback to the conservative Koch brothers.</u>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The bill allows the Walker administration, without approval of the Public Service Commission and without a competitive bidding process, to sell off or lease the state's several dozen energy plants to private companies.
</span>
The state can sell the energy plants "with or without the solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state," according to the rather circular wording of this clause, which then concludes that "<u>any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest.</u>"

This is not new news — shortly after the release of the bill, the Wisconsin State Journal published an article about the measure, and so did the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and other state media.

What's different is that now, thanks in part to the delay caused by Democratic state senators fleeing the state to stall the measure, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>people are starting to connect some dots. </span></div></div>

The lapdog licks its master's hand.

After the fake phone call there can be no doubt who he serves and it certainly isn't the people of WI.



Scumbag.



Q

LWW
02-24-2011, 05:08 AM
States have had state authorized energy monopolies for decades.

Although I disagree in principle with the way things are done, there is absolutely nothing new about this.

LWW

Qtec
02-24-2011, 07:16 AM
No bid contracts?????????????????

More.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The bill also employs <span style='font-size: 14pt'>“emergency” powers that would allow the governor’s appointed health secretary to redefine the foundations of the state’s Medicaid program,</span> Badgercare, ranging from eligibility to premiums, with only passive legislative review. The attorney in the legislature’s nonpartisan reference bureau who prepared the bill warned that a court could invalidate the statute for <u>violating separation of powers doctrine.</u>

The legislation, the lawyer wrote in a “drafter’s note” about the bill, would allow the state Department of Health Services to “<span style='font-size: 17pt'>change any Medical Assistance law, for any reason, at any time, and potentially without notice or public hearing.</span>.. in addition to eliminating notice and publication requirements, [the changes] would leave the emergency rules in effect without any requirement to make permanent rules and without any time limit.”</div></div>

The guy is a dictator. A jumped up sneaky bought and paid for lying POS that probably got bullied when he was young and now seeks revenge by punishing his peers.


Q

LWW
02-24-2011, 07:24 AM
I thought you loved gubmint ran health care?

Let me guess ... this thread is now about horse racing?

LWW

LWW
02-24-2011, 07:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No bid contracts?????????????????

More.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The bill also employs <span style='font-size: 14pt'>“emergency” powers that would allow the governor’s appointed health secretary to redefine the foundations of the state’s Medicaid program,</span> Badgercare, ranging from eligibility to premiums, with only passive legislative review. The attorney in the legislature’s nonpartisan reference bureau who prepared the bill warned that a court could invalidate the statute for <u>violating separation of powers doctrine.</u>

The legislation, the lawyer wrote in a “drafter’s note” about the bill, would allow the state Department of Health Services to “<span style='font-size: 17pt'>change any Medical Assistance law, for any reason, at any time, and potentially without notice or public hearing.</span>.. in addition to eliminating notice and publication requirements, [the changes] would leave the emergency rules in effect without any requirement to make permanent rules and without any time limit.”</div></div>

The guy is a dictator. A jumped up sneaky bought and paid for lying POS that probably got bullied when he was young and now seeks revenge by punishing his peers.


Q </div></div>

So ... what is this "dirty little secret" you babble about?

LWW

Gayle in MD
02-24-2011, 09:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No....he is not a closet homosexual foot tapper as far as I know, if that's what you were all thinking. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

It seems its not ALL about breaking the Unions.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The bill includes a provision that would allow the state to sell or contract out the operation of heating, cooling, and power plants <span style='font-size: 20pt'>without a bidding process and without consulting the state’s independent utility regulator.</span> Democratic legislators worried aloud that the process would attract abuse, and Jon Peacock, director of the Wisconsin Budget Project, called the no-bid approach a “red flag.” </div></div>

Quiz.

Are any of Scott's backers in the power business?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Vital Signs: <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Media hones in on Koch brothers and Walker's proposal to sell state energy plants</span> <span style="color: #990000"> Can't wait to hear the Fox News take on this, if they mention it.</span>

SHAWN DOHERTY | The Capital Times | sdoherty@madison.com | Posted: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 7:30 am

No wonder Gov. Walker was in such a hurry to get his budget repair bill passed. Every day new stuff comes out about it.

The labor issues were obvious and got all the attention for a while. But then people started uncovering the fact that the bill would hand the Walker administration sweeping powers to revamp Medicaid with little public and legislative input.

<u>Now a third piece of the 144-page bill is making headlines — a power grab some critics believe could be political payback to the conservative Koch brothers.</u>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The bill allows the Walker administration, without approval of the Public Service Commission and without a competitive bidding process, to sell off or lease the state's several dozen energy plants to private companies.
</span>
The state can sell the energy plants "with or without the solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state," according to the rather circular wording of this clause, which then concludes that "<u>any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest.</u>"

This is not new news — shortly after the release of the bill, the Wisconsin State Journal published an article about the measure, and so did the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and other state media.

What's different is that now, thanks in part to the delay caused by Democratic state senators fleeing the state to stall the measure, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>people are starting to connect some dots. </span></div></div>

The lapdog licks its master's hand.

After the fake phone call there can be no doubt who he serves and it certainly isn't the people of WI.



Scumbag.



Q </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The lapdog licks its master's hand.

After the fake phone call there can be no doubt who he serves and it certainly isn't the people of WI.



Scumbag.



Q

</div></div>

<span style="color: #660000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Obviously he is! As ALL Repiglicans, are. </span> </span>

LWW
02-24-2011, 09:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">U.S. Awards No-Bid Contract in Afghanistan Despite Promises of Competition
Published January 22, 2011
Associated Press

The U.S. government awarded a no-bid, $266 million contract for a lucrative electricity project in southern Afghanistan despite promising last year to seek competitive bids from other companies, The Associated Press has learned. </div></div>
Why doesn't this bother you? (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/22/awards-bid-contract-afghanistan-despite-promises-competition/#ixzz1EtJY8Kn8)

LWW

LWW
02-24-2011, 09:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guess who got Obama’s no-bid contract
May 8, 2010 by Don Surber
President Obama has awarded a no-bid contract to KBR Inc. for $568 million.

That’s more than 20,000 times the maximum he set for a no-bid contract.

KBR is the old Brown and Root and Kellogg companies, which merged with Halliburton when Dick Cheney headed Halliburton and later Halliburton spun off KBR.

From Bloomberg News: “KBR Inc. was selected for a no-bid contract worth as much as $568 million through 2011 for military support services in Iraq, the Army said.”

Once again, liberal ethics are shown to be situational. They complained long and hard about no-bid contracts for KBR. </div></div>

Why doesn't this bother you? (http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/13675)

LWW

LWW
02-24-2011, 09:44 AM
I bet you begged for seconds on this spoonage:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”</span>
<span style='font-size: 11pt'>-Candidate Barack Hussein Obama Junior-
--- 10 November, 2007 Anno Domini ---</span></div></div>

LWW

Sev
02-24-2011, 09:50 AM
Hmmmmm.

Where did they go?

Soflasnapper
02-25-2011, 06:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">U.S. Awards No-Bid Contract in Afghanistan Despite Promises of Competition
Published January 22, 2011
Associated Press

The U.S. government awarded a no-bid, $266 million contract for a lucrative electricity project in southern Afghanistan despite promising last year to seek competitive bids from other companies, The Associated Press has learned. </div></div>
Why doesn't this bother you? (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/22/awards-bid-contract-afghanistan-despite-promises-competition/#ixzz1EtJY8Kn8)

</div></div>

US AID is an independent agency. I don't think that the POTUS has any control over their actions, which were determined by the legislation called the Foreign Aid Act, except that he appoints the head and some others.

The 'promise of competition'? Given by US AID officials.

LWW
02-26-2011, 12:41 AM
Serious question ... is there anything you wouldn't try to make excuses for dear leader over?

LWW

Qtec
02-26-2011, 04:07 AM
My take on this is that Soflasnapper knows what he is talking about and you don't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there anything you wouldn't try to make excuses for dear leader over? </div></div>

Not excuses, reasons and explanations.

You are so partisan you can't tell the difference anymore.

Q

Gayle in MD
02-26-2011, 04:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My take on this is that Soflasnapper knows what he is talking about and you don't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there anything you wouldn't try to make excuses for dear leader over? </div></div>

Not excuses, reasons and explanations.

You are so partisan you can't tell the difference anymore.

Q
</div></div>

When the entire goal is to twist the truth, by building mountains out of mole hills, in order to demonize the President, even documented, traditional, ho hum government as usual, functions, are blown into a national Crisis.

LOL...

LWW
02-26-2011, 03:01 PM
I ran the post through babblefish and this was the interpretation:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My take on this is that Soflasnapper knows what he is talking about and you don't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there anything you wouldn't try to make excuses for dear leader over? </div></div>

<s>Not excuses, reasons and explanations.

You are so partisan you can't tell the difference anymore.</s>

<span style='font-size: 8pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 8pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

Q
</div></div>

<s>When the entire goal is to twist the truth, by building mountains out of mole hills, in order to demonize the President, even documented, traditional, ho hum government as usual, functions, are blown into a national Crisis.

LOL...</s>

<span style='font-size: 8pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 8pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>I MUST DEFEND THE REGIME!</span>
</div></div>

LWW